ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2017
Stereochemical Sequence Ion Selectivity: Proline versus Pipecolic-acid-containing Protonated Peptides.
Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Leaving Group Effects in a Series of Electrosprayed CJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2019Article
- Fragmentation Pathways of Lithiated Hexose Monosaccharides.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2018Article
- Cationized Carbohydrate Gas-Phase Fragmentation Chemistry.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Substitution of proline by pipecolic acid, the six-membered ring congener of proline, results in vastly different tandem mass spectra. The well-known proline effect is eliminated and amide bond cleavage C-terminal to pipecolic acid dominates instead. Why do these two ostensibly similar residues produce dramatically differing spectra? Recent evidence indicates that the proton affinities of these residues are similar, so are unlikely to explain the result [Raulfs et al., J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 25, 1705-1715 (2014)]. An additional hypothesis based on increased flexibility was also advocated. Here, we provide a computational investigation of the "pipecolic acid effect," to test this and other hypotheses to determine if theory can shed additional light on this fascinating result. Our calculations provide evidence for both the increased flexibility of pipecolic-acid-containing peptides, and structural changes in the transition structures necessary to produce the sequence ions. The most striking computational finding is inversion of the stereochemistry of the transition structures leading to "proline effect"-type amide bond fragmentation between the proline/pipecolic acid-congeners: R (proline) to S (pipecolic acid). Additionally, our calculations predict substantial stabilization of the amide bond cleavage barriers for the pipecolic acid congeners by reduction in deleterious steric interactions and provide evidence for the importance of experimental energy regime in rationalizing the spectra. Graphical Abstract ᅟ.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.